On Fri, 2005-06-03 at 20:40, Robert Story wrote: > I just noticed that you added 4 pointers to the cache_handler structure > for passing handler args to the load routine. This does almost the exact > same thing as the cache hint stuff I added in 5.2.
> I'd like to see if we can't agree on a merging of the two. That would be sensible, yes. > Well, actually, since the cache_hint method is already released, it would > be more like removing your version. Fine by me. The only place this is used is in the '_netsnmp_stash_cache_load' routine (in helpers/stash_cache.c). So if you tweak that to use the cache_hint pointers instead, it should be safe to remove the separate pointers. > I don't think competing methods would be a good idea, but you are > welcome to try and convince me. The main disadvantage of the 'cache_hint' approach is that the hint field is defined as an opaque "void*" pointer. How is a MIB developer meant to know how to use it? Given that's it's only ever used as a pointer to a netsnmp_handler_args structure, why not declare it as such. Then at least the MIB developer might have a fighting chance of knowing what to do with it! Dave ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: NEC IT Guy Games. How far can you shotput a projector? How fast can you ride your desk chair down the office luge track? If you want to score the big prize, get to know the little guy. Play to win an NEC 61" plasma display: http://www.necitguy.com/?r=20 _______________________________________________ Net-snmp-coders mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
